Skip to main content

About your Search

20121101
20121130
STATION
FOXNEWS 12
MSNBC 9
MSNBCW 9
FBC 7
CNNW 4
CNN 3
CSPAN 3
CNBC 1
KGO (ABC) 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
WJLA (ABC) 1
WMAR (ABC) 1
WRC (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 68
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 68 (some duplicates have been removed)
've been told the cia had been telling susan rice? >> i think the real problem for general petraeus in this story is that it not only does not mesh with what the white house was saying, it doesn't mesh with what we're told general petraeus said in the immediate aftermath, where he is said to have talked about a spontaneous flash mob. >> to members of congress. >> to members of congress behind closed doors as well and this is the problem. it's not only that we know that that's not true now, it's that at the time there were a lot of other indications that indicate that was not true, denied by the libyan prime minister, the cia station chief called it an act of terror. we had the fbi and i believe the national center for counterterrorism also giving briefings. >> paul: that's right. >> saying this. why was general petraeus's testimony then so at odds with other parts of the community? >> but does this, would this give-- what does it mean for, say, susan rice and the administration then? is this, does this help them politically by shielding them or does petraeus here saying i thought it
lindsey graham giving his view of ambassador susan rice and her role in the administration spin on the benghazi terror attacks and the president's reactions to those statements at his first news conference since being reelected. mr. obama, defending ms. rice, but his defense has actually added more to the controversy. senator graham reacted to the president by saying, mr. president, don't think for one minute i don't hold you responsible for benghazi, i think you failed as commander-in-chief before, during and after the attack. so much to get to first on this, jim, the showdown between the two senators, graham and mccain and the president. abc's terry moran called it an obama smackdown. "the washington post" john mccain's benghazi, and some say it's about mccain being bitter about losing to obama four years ago. >> i think five names and a conflagration, and number one petraeus and broadwell and number two, benghazi, benghazi, petraeus, broadwell, military ethics, mccain obama reduction, and fifth, the susan rice story, which life imitates art. if you go back and watch the movie
session. i can give you my assessment based on questions, my investigation, that what susan rice did was use talking points, pulled out originally by the cia signed off by the intelligence community, those were requested by the house committee. the intelligence committee sign off of it. the key was there were unclassified talking points at an early stage. i do not think she should be pelerine for this. she did what i would have done or anybody else would have done that was going on a weekend show. you would have said what talking points can i use? you get an unclassified version. i just remember -- i just read it to the committee what i was going to tell you and questions asked. to be sure it did not violate our rules. this particularly is for people in public office because you are used to answering questions candidly to have to be restricted to what is unclassified. is very difficult for your >> did he talk about his resignation? >> [indiscernible] >> i think it is making a very divisive -- we have seen wrong intelligence before. it all surrounded our going into iraq. a lot of peop
, therefore, not in the much talked about talking points that susan rice and others refer to publicly where there was a lot more focus on the potential for a spontaneous demonstration, the video, that kind of thing. that the piece of this puzzle that was more clearly known by the intelligence community of the involvement of terror groups was classified. in part that could be argued as a protection required in order to try to pursue them, that kind of thing. that is new information today, and it helps to show us how there might have been two tracks happening all along. the public statements that were reflecting part of what they may have known. the real question is, if they knew it was terrorism all along, was there too much suggestion that a video or demonstrations may have been involved? that's what people see very differently often based on their political point of view. >> yes, and it is based on political point of view. the fact of the matter, the information that susan rice was provided and what she indicated on "meet the press" and other programs, that would have been a part of the de
was taken out of the final version that we believe was ultimately given to the u.n. ambassador, susan rice. why was that done? who did this? catherine herridge is live on capitol hill. reporter: that's right. congressional horses tell fox news that there were changes to the cia talking points and that language of al qaeda affiliated individuals was replace -- replaced, which have the impact of minimizing or downplaying the role of al qaeda and another group, al sharia come on the consulate on 9/11. there was also testimony this week that the intelligence community to those talking points and went to an interagency process. so that other elements of the intelligence community as well as input and review by the state department, as well as the department of justice, that eventually made its way to ambassador susan rice. no one commissioner who was the final author of this talking point given to ambassador susan rice, who is on the sunday talk show on september 16 and repeated on multiple occasions that meant david was in response to the anti-islam video and that was a demonstration that had
very critical of u.n. ambassador susan rice. you were critical in tv appearances right after the attack on september 11th. let's listen to that. >> either ambassador rice was deliberately misleading the american people or she showed and demonstrated such a lack of knowledge and sophistication that she shouldn't hold that position anymore. >> now, during friday's hearing, david petraeus, and we'll get to other incidents -- other news with david petraeus later, but david petraeus basically said he knew it was a terrorist attack and that those points were taken out of susan rice's talking points. so do you -- do you feel differently about susan rice now? >> no, first of all, as far as general petraeus, what was clear was that the intelligence community had this right, and they put together talking points, and somewhere after it left the intelligence community, some way in the administration there was language taken out. susan rice, i would hope if she's going to go on national television, is going to rely on more than unclassified talking points. she has -- >> but if the information wasn't
were taken out of susan rice's talking points, so do you -- do you feel differently about susan rice now? >> no, first of all, as far as general petraeus, what was clear was that the intelligence community had this right and they put together talking points and somewhere after it left the intelligence community, some way in the administration there was language taken out. susan rice, i would hope if she's going to go on national television is going to rely on more than unclassified talking points. she has -- >> but if the information wasn't in the talking points, what is she supposed to do. >> well, as u.n. ambassador she had access to all the classified information from the state department. she certainly could have gotten a classified briefing and would have sat dowational security council and known that those talking points had been watered down and could have -- she left a clear impression this was a spontaneous demonstration based on the video and as president obama said, don't blame susan rice because she had nothing to do with benghazi then why did they send her out as the rep
, the talking points of susan rice saw in the next 48 hours before she appeared on the sunday talk shows said it was mob violence and video. what do you make of that, tucker? >> this was the big revelation of the day as far as i can tell. it's not clear that susan rice didn't see the original talking points, but the administration conceded today all, but conceded, said, flat-out, we know that al-qaeda was involved, and the term al-qaeda was listed in the origin tell againintelligen and taken out. and the administration says al-qaeda or affiliates classified information, so they had to be scrubbed from what was given to congress. and even if you accept that's a legitimate operating procedure, you have to acknowledge that they've intentionally misled, susan rice-- >> who is they? >> susan rice, but clearly the cia knew this. it's inconceivable that the american ambassador to the united nations was sent out on television with totally incomplete information, with talking points that had been basically scrubbed and having no knowledge of what was originally in them. >> is it clear that susan rice
diane feinstein defendeded u.n. ambassador susan rice. >> he made it clear that there was significant terrorist involvement. that is not my recollection of what he told us september 14th. >> to say that she is unqualified to be secretary of state i think is a mistake. and the way it keeps going, it's almost as if the intent is to assess nate -- >> joining me now is karen finny a political analyst and armstrong williams a conservative columnist and host of the right side with armstrong williams. hello to you both. good to see you. >> hi, alex. >> ladies first with you, karen. you just heard from congressman king. one of his biggest complaints was the white house held back information that this was a terrorist attack claiming this was classified. this is different from the white house's initial defense that they did call it a terrorist attack right away. are they changing their tune? >> well, what i find interesting is the way congressman king and a number of the other republicans have changed their tune from the night before the briefing and oh, what a difference it makes when you actu
. >> that leads us now to susan rice, the u.s. ambassador to the united nations who went on national television and said this attack in benghazi, libya, was probably because of this anti-muslim film. >> reporter: exactly. >> she had talking points, right? where did those talking points come from? did they come from petraeus and the cia, were they edited later by the white house, do we know? >> reporter: we don't know. you heard peter king was asked that specific question. according to him and some others, we still don't know exactly where the disconnect was, if you will, between what the intelligence community now says that they believed at the time and the talking points that ended up with susan rice that ended up on television that sunday afterwards. it still doesn't seem to be very clear. the reason why he is now the former cia director is because of the affair that david petraeus had. he resigned one week ago. the question is whether or not that would come up at all. he said it was addressed at the beginning and he regretted what happened and that they didn't really address it at all after
by the cia and what was ultimately embraced to am bass sore susan rice. what we mean here is there was a review process and an editing process in which the emphasis on extremist groups, al-qaida, an sar al says sharia was deemphasized in the second version used by ambassador rice. at what point did the former cia director believe that this was an act of terrorism or an act of extremists? a s*r member of the committee told fox a sort time ago was what the director laid off was an evolving picture on intel kwrepbs. >> he reinforced the facts -- in the first 24 hours he felt at that point, or the cia felt at that point that this was a protest as a result of what happened with the film. he clarified that after -- after more information came in there was not a protest. >> reporter: one lawmaker telling fox after the hearing that he did feel that there were discrepancies between the former cia director's statements today about what he said on september 14th, and the recollection of that lawmaker. let's listen. >> his testimony today was that from the start he had told us that th
like yourself talk that this issue is much bigger than susan rice. let me drill down on one area here. because yesterday the cia acting director at 10:00 a.m. apparently blamed the fbi for changing the language and the guidance and the talking points. at 4:00 in the afternoon the cia acting director came back and said it was at cia after all. what explains that? >> this stuff is coming from the white house. they are hoping this will go away. i don't happen to be one of the senators she cares to talk about and maybe it's because while opposed to her from her position as ambassador of the united nations and nothing could change my mind on that. bill: based on that answer it appears you are willing to take that answer higher than susan rice with it comes to benghazi. >> this will go down as the biggest coverup in history. they all knew it. they are hoping to have it go beyond the election date which it did. but people are not going to forget it. the administration deliberately covered this and misrepresented what happened in benghazi threatened up in the both of four people. one of whom
some of her biggest critics. ambassador susan rice goes to capitol hill this hour where she will meet with republican lawmakers who have been furious with her initial remarks on libyan terror attack. how will this story go? that is our lead morning. i'm bill hemmer. martha: i'm martha maccallum. about five days after our consulate was attacked on september the 11th we all remember ambassador rice went on all five sunday shows and said the killing of the ambassador and three other americans was actually the result of a spontaneous mob sparking outrage, those comments did, from top gop lawmakers including these three senators, mccain, graham and ayotte. >> don't we all have the responsibility before we go out and talk to the american people on all five sunday morning shows for verifying those facts are true? >> the most basic information about what happened on the night of the attack, and what survivors had to say after the attack is not being provided and we'll talk more about that. bill: so you wonder then whether or not they will get the answers they're looking for. whether or not so
that hearing to rally around susan rice. >> to say that she is unqualified to be secretary of state, i think, is a mistake. and the way it keeps going, it's almost as if -- >> and the middle east on the brink. israel and hamas exchanging fire as casualties mount. amid talk of all-out war. >> will continue to exercise this prudence and self-restraint while defending our citizens against terrorism. >> opening round, president obama and congressional leaders kick off talks to avoid the looming fiscal cliff. >> what folks are looking for and i think all of us agree on this, action. they want to see we are focused on them, not focused on our politics here in washington. >> the framework that i've outlined in our meeting today is consistent with the president's call for a fair and balanced approach. to show our seriousness we put revenue on the table as long as it's accompanied by significant spending cuts. >> i can say on the part of my members that we fully understand that you can't save the country until you have entitlement programs that fit the demographics of the changing america in the comi
the whole white house. take a listen. >> so when the president says that susan rice was giving out -- talking about the most updated and -- fully documented intelligence that the intelligence community had, that's not true. >> last night the message was that susan rice was disseminating incorrect intelligence and the president is wrong for defending her. now here is mr. king today after an intelligence briefing. >> did he seem concerned that things had been changed? was that surprising to you? >> he seemed to say at the time they didn't realize the full significance of that and that or an unclassified statement it was acceptable. again, it's still very vague. >> petraeus told king today that, quote, for an unclassified statement this was acceptable. again, it's still very vague. dana, to paraphrase the president, republicans got out in front of their own skis on this one, didn't they? >> yes. well, in congress they have a tradition of revising and extending their remarks and i think peter king -- what peter king just said was "never mind." >> what he said earlier, what do we do wit
's comments five days later? why that was still the line of spontaneous -- >> we talked some about susan rice. susan rice got a lot of the same information that we did. i'll make a comparison to colin powell. when colin powell went before the united nations, getting information from the administration on the facts. >> you said that within 24 hours -- [inaudible] this was five days later. >> i said they knew right away that there were terrorists involved in the operation. >> why wasn't that part -- >> wait, are you finished? what? give it to me. >> in other words, if he knew within 24 hours it was terrorist-related, how come five days later in the talking points for susan rice it still was saying it's a spontaneous demonstration? >> i assume dish didn't talk to susan rice, i assume she received information and he was not a part of briefing susan rice. information coming together with a different agencies that were involved and had jurisdiction, giving information to susan rice or anyone else, including our committee. >> i was following that. you answered the question. >> he was the head of the
of susan rice? is hurt future in limbo because of libya? two years ago, the people of bp made a commitment to the gulf. bp has paid over twenty-three billion dollars to help those affected and to cover cleanup costs. today, the beaches and gulf are open, and many areas are reporting their best tourism seasons in years. d bp's also committed to america. we support nearly 250,000 jobs and invest more here than anywhere else. we're working to fuel america for generations to come. our commitment has never been stronger. looking back if it wasn't for shriners hospital,. things would just be really, really different. i lost my leg when i was a kid. there was a time when i felt like i wasn't going to be able to walk again... it was a pretty bad accident but shriners showed me who i could be again. they turned my whole life around. hunter's life is one of nearly a million changed by donations from people like you. send your love to the rescue. donate today. reporter: i would like to bring in michael sing who is the washington director for north east policy. we have this breaking news on israel. th
is is who exexunged the al qaeda terrorism line before it was given to susan rice and she was sent out on those five sunday morning talk shows to say no it was actually a film and a riot gone bad. so as you know there were a couple of senators who say that they have lost faith with susan rice. that she went out and said something misleading. but the president, at his first press conference since being reelected said, please, don't blame her, in fact, he went so far to say she had nothing to do -- knee knew nothing about benghazi. she had nothing to do with benghazi. here he is defending susan rice. >> she made an appearance at the request of the white house in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. >> so. >> okay. then why the heck did you send her out there? she knew nothing about what happened. petraeus was in washington. several other high ranking officials who knew what happened were in washington. if you want us to go after you, then
giving its best initial assessment to dr. susan rice who then gave that assessment to the public on behalf of the white house and then the assessment changed on the part of the cia. i'm not sure what the scandal is but i've heard words like watergate being thrown around which i think goes a step too far and is too political. >> cameras did not catch petraeus arriving this morning even though there were reporters staking out every possible entrance and all we saw was a black car leaving his home early this morning. "the washington post" is reporting also here that the hearings are being held in secret committee rooms used for discussion on national security matters. what do you think this says about how petraeus is viewed on the hill? >> well, i don't know what republicans, whether they're fishing for a scandal or not but i'm fishing for answers. there's no doubt that the public was given misleading and wrong information at the beginning by susan rice. the president was exactly right. she was just reading the talking points she was given by the administration and she was on that s
to the defense of susan rice, the u.s. ambassador to the united nations, who just a few days after the attack as you recall said violence on the u.s. consulate in benghazi began as a spontaneous protest against an anti-islam film. two top-ranking republicans are vowing to block rice's nomination if she is picked to be the next secretary of state. the president firing back with a rare flash of anger. >> senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. >> white house correspondent dan lothian, live from washington this morning. it's really nice to see you, dan. >> good to see you. >> let's first talk about the fiscal cliff. the president said we could see a deal by next week. that may hinge on this issue with taxes. how are republicans responding to the president's remarks? >> well, you know, first of all, there does seem a willingness by republicans to find areas of agreement, to reach a compromise. but they are pushing back on the president's plan because they don't believe that a solution should lie in tax hikes for any americans, including the
anxiety. bill: who changed the talking points on benghazi before susan rice hit the talk show circuit and peter king wants answers. he's here live in minutes. >> the talking point were drafted to. they said after it went through the process, which they seemed unclear about, that was taken out. . because your daughter really wants that pink castle thing. and you really don't want to pay more than you have to. only citi price rewind automatically searches for the lowest price. and it finds one, you get refunded the difference. just use your citi card and register your purchase online. have a super sparkly day! ok. [ male announcer ] now all you need is a magic carriage. citi price rewind. buy now. save later. bill: hamas is saying the conflict is all the fault of israel. fan it wants the violence to end it needs to give in to the group's demands. we just spoke to the israeli ambassador and he says the burden is on hamas. >> there is in country on earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders. we are fully supportive of israel's right to defend
susan rice. he does not know who the author of the final version was and these talking points would be uses as the basis for the statements on sunday talk shows on september 16th that this was spontaneous event and linked to the anti-islam video. lawmakers said they wanted to stay very focused on the attack itself and not the former director's personal problems. >> human nature is what it is but the intent going we'll limit the conversation to the events of 9/11 and forward throughout the rest of the, six, eight weeks ensued since the attacks on our consulate. >> reporter: in addition to what's unfolding here on capitol hill fox news separately has confirmed the cia has begun a preliminary investigation into the former director's tenure at the cia. that would include whether any cia assets or materials if you will were used to facilitate this affair or alleged affair with his biographer, paula broadwell, bill. bill: a lot of people look at this on the outside and look at today as a day where you might be able to settle some things but in all honesty how much will be settled after to
or not this president will go ahead with the nomination of susan rice, given all the revelations by david petraeus today before the senate and house. first want to bring you up-to-date on what is happening in the middle east and israel appears closer to a possible ground operation in gaza. the israelis have ordered up another 45,000 reservists. they are on standby now, and that is an additional 75,000 total reserves that are now massing on the border with gaza. the israelis are vowing to intensify there air strikes on the gaza strip, that after palestinian -- palestinian -- palestinian militants targeted tel aviv. , says no fired more than 450 rockets at israel over the past three days. at least 23 palestinians have been reported killed in the fighting along with three israelis. th violence straining israeli relations with egypt. the senate's prime minister, not its promise to the president, prime minister to gaza to show solidarity with the paestinians and to, some say, a broker truce. moments ago men yahoo called president obama to discuss options for the escalating the crisis. that is the latest ther
attacks. and then congressional black caucus chair comments on the for this is -- criticism of susan rice. tomorrow on "washington journal," julian sanchez on the privacy of e-mails when and federal investigation is involved. charles komanoff talks about taxing co2 emissions. and anna edney on the fda. 7:00 eastern on c-span. >> truman was vice president for 82 days. being truman, he actually presided over the senate. that is the vice-president does not bother with that unless a vote is needed to break a tie. he said, that is my job. truman never learned anything from fdr or from his staff. it was a transition with a zero knowledge. that does not happen anymore. he got a phone call from the white house. get to the phone right away. he picked up the phone. at the other and they said, get to the white house as soon as you can. so he grabbed his hat and dashed out. he had a car. they gave him a chauffeur. he was taken upstairs to the second floor, that is the family for. he was met by eleanor roosevelt. he looked up and she said, the president is dead. he was in total shock. he said, what c
by the white house, and who was he in tact with, and susan rice-- >> what about that, what do you think he knows specifically and do you think he's the one that provided the information where susan rice went out and told everybody, no, no, video, it's due to a video? >> well, general-- a general took a hit for that, and no way he'd take that hit for that, and general petraeus was part of that process. i have respect for him. great american hero and patriot and his testimony is essential, he could say i wasn't at that meeting only petraeus would have known exactly what happened at that time. >> jamie: there's many, congressman king, who agree with you, that general petraeus is essential to getting answers on what happened to four americans who were killed and why. and so, the question is, the timing. and they knew about his extramarital affair, it would appear before the election, we didn't learn about it until after, he didn't resign until after. is there more to this? >> jamie, i can't accept this whole story, first of all, when did the investigation begin? and if the fbi is surveilling t
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 68 (some duplicates have been removed)